Ravindra Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 11431 of 2024

¶3

Ravindra Singh

¶4

.....Applicant(s)

¶5

	Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy.	Home Deptt. Lko. .....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Vikas Pandey, Diwakar Prasad Sharma, Nijam Ahamad, Rakesh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A., D.P. Dutt Tiwari, Dharmendra Kumar Tiwari

¶6

Court No. - 15

¶7

HON'BLE KARUNESH SINGH PAWAR, J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A for the State and perused the record.

¶9

In the prosecution case, it is alleged that the land in question was purchased by the informant from the brother of the applicant namely Nand Kishor Singh on 10.03.2010. Her name was mutated on the basis of the registered sale deed in the revenue records. It is alleged that later on, the applicant, in collusion with the record room employees, have got his name entered into that property. The certified copy of the record of the land has been obtained by the complainant, which shows that forged entry has been made. It is further stated that the copy of the sale deed dated 19.10.2012 has already been obtained, which does not show any such entry.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The applicant has criminal history of one case which has been explained by him in paragraph13 of the bail application and he is languishing in jail since 04.09.2024.

¶11

It is further submitted that there is delay of 8 years in filing the F.I.R. The offences are triable by the Magistrate and the chargesheet has already been filed. There is no possibility of the applicant of fleeing away after being released from jail or tampering with the witnesses. In case the applicant is enlarged on bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of bail.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶13

BAIL No. 11431 of 2024

¶14

2

¶15

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, and also considering the nature of allegations, arguments advanced by learned counsel for the parties, prima facie, the dispute appears to be civil in nature, the fact that the applicant is languishing in jail since 04.09.2024, the fact that the applicant has explained criminal history of one case in paragraph-13 of the bail application as also the fact that there is no independent witness and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I find it to be a fit case for enlarging the applicant on bail.

¶16

7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed.

¶17

Let the applicant Ravindra Singh, involved in Case Crime/FIR No. 349 of 2023, Under Sections- 420, 467, 468, 504, 506 I.P.C, Police StationAkbarpur, District- Ambedkar Nagar, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions which are being imposed in the interest of justice:-

¶18

(i) The applicant will not tamper with the evidence during the trial.

¶19

(ii) The applicant will not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness.

¶20

(iii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer or tamper with the evidence.

¶21

(iv) The applicant shall file an undertaking to the effect that he shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence when the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law.

¶22

(v) The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him in accordance with law.

¶23

(vi) In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail during trial and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. (now Section 84 BNSS) is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law under Section 174-A IPC (now Section 209 of BNS).

¶24

BAIL No. 11431 of 2024

¶25

3

¶26

It is clarified that the observations made in this order are confined to the present bail application and shall have no bearing on the merits of the trial.

¶27

November 3, 2025 DiVYa

¶28

(Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ravindra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dharmendra Madhesiya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home U.P. Lko.

Dhanpat Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt of Home and 3 Others

Salim @ Lala (as Per Rejection Order ) Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko.

Niraj Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Ruksar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Ramsamujh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.